I was on my way to work on a divided four lane highway. I was in the right hand lane following the flow of traffic. There was a slower car ahead of me and I wanted to change lanes and maintain my speed. When I looked in my left side mirror, I notice a red car going pretty fast in the passing lane, so I slowed down and waited. Once the speeder had passed my car the passing lane was clear. I changed lanes, accelerated a bit, and started to overtake the slower car. I was just about to go back in the right hand lane when the speeder (still in the passing lane) put on its brakes, so I put on my brakes. The speeder put on its brakes again, so I put on my brakes again. At that point I figured there must be an accident or something, but I couldnt see anything in front of me, except a speeder trying to slow down. For a split second, I was thinking of going back in the right hand lane, but after putting on the brakes twice, I had lost track to the slower car in the right hand lane. So, I stayed in the passing lane behind the speeder and we both went slower and slower. We were crawling along in the passing lane when I noticed a police cruiser parked on the left. I figured the officer nabbed the speeder, and I was going to go along my marry way. The speeder stopped on the left side of the road and then the officer signalled me to stop as well, so I did. He claimed he clocked me doing 127 kph in a 100 zone. Im pretty sure he had the speeder clocked at 130 kph, and Im sure I wasnt going that fast. Could the officer have made a mistake, given the speeder was in front of me from the point I changed lanes?
I have used night vision to see the beam, very neat. However, we are not trained/ qualified to align a scope. That must be done by the repair facility. What we do is ensure the unit is sighting properly, if the lidar fails the test, we place it out of service and send it for repair on the next Purolator truck.
Reflections wrote:
Lidar used by officers is invisible to the naked eye. You can however use nightvision to see them. I wonder why officers are not using nightvision to align the scopes???
I have used night vision to see the beam, very neat.
However, we are not trained/ qualified to align a scope. That must be done by the repair facility. What we do is ensure the unit is sighting properly, if the lidar fails the test, we place it out of service and send it for repair on the next Purolator truck.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
To my use, I start observing vehicles about 1km away (through scope) monitor, then hit the vehicle with lidar around 700m. Then again around 550m. Then my final hit is around 500m-100m. This allows a visual observation, confirmed targetting history. The lidar beam is very concentrated being this close and any smog would be less than minimal affect. The addition of moisture in the air reduces the effective range of the lidar. ie light rain might reduce my first reading from 700m down to 500m. Snow is just horrible and a waste of my time using a lidar. It is not affecting the accuracy of the readings, just how far away a vehicle can be targetted.
Reflections wrote:
One thing though. I know that light travels at a constant speed in a vacuum. The atmosphere is not a vacuum. Dirt, smog.....all those airbourne particles can effect light. How would this be compensated for....? I know you're coming back to this 'bear so..... The further away a target is from the gun the more the "light" is going to slow down, simple physics. Is there a setting you have for "smoggy" days??? I know there are foul weather modes on different models. You cannot compensate for the unknown.
To my use, I start observing vehicles about 1km away (through scope) monitor, then hit the vehicle with lidar around 700m. Then again around 550m. Then my final hit is around 500m-100m. This allows a visual observation, confirmed targetting history. The lidar beam is very concentrated being this close and any smog would be less than minimal affect.
The addition of moisture in the air reduces the effective range of the lidar. ie light rain might reduce my first reading from 700m down to 500m. Snow is just horrible and a waste of my time using a lidar. It is not affecting the accuracy of the readings, just how far away a vehicle can be targetted.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
And at the end of the day, I would rather use lidar. At 100m Lidar = 30cm beam width Radar = 20 metres There is absolutely never any doubt with lidar which vehicle is travelling what speed. although......my best is at night, obtain a speed via radar/lidar, catch the vehicle and then pace it....then pull up beside and READ the drivers speedometer. (even more icing on the cake when the speedometer is digital :shock: )
And at the end of the day, I would rather use lidar.
At 100m
Lidar = 30cm beam width
Radar = 20 metres
There is absolutely never any doubt with lidar which vehicle is travelling what speed.
although......my best is at night, obtain a speed via radar/lidar, catch the vehicle and then pace it....then pull up beside and READ the drivers speedometer. (even more icing on the cake when the speedometer is digital )
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
New civic's are very nice for you...... Your style is very thorough. Next time you have the oppertunity on a smoggy day, light someone up from 1 km and keep the gun on them. If the speed decreases the closer they get closer then there is some effect. I know you'll say they let they're foot off the gas but this would help prove the theory.
New civic's are very nice for you......
Your style is very thorough. Next time you have the oppertunity on a smoggy day, light someone up from 1 km and keep the gun on them. If the speed decreases the closer they get closer then there is some effect.
I know you'll say they let they're foot off the gas but this would help prove the theory.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Your style is very thorough. Next time you have the oppertunity on a smoggy day, light someone up from 1 km and keep the gun on them. If the speed decreases the closer they get closer then there is some effect.
I know you'll say they let they're foot off the gas but this would help prove the theory.
I'll give that a shot....pardon the pun!!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The best way is to store your pictures on any free file storing website. www.Photobucket.com is free and provides 1 GB of free space. Once you have uploaded your picture you can simply post your picture/image on this forum using bbcode: Code: Select all [img]http://your-image-link-goes-here.com/image.jpg[/img]
Imax wrote:
Is there a way of uploading pics on this forum? I have a few NURBS pics.
The best way is to store your pictures on any free file storing website.
thanks admin. It's working :lol: NURBS setup. Two cars, one at 500m and one at 570m. Laser offset, 10m. The laser beam is a cone, 600m long and 1.8m at the base. A perspecive: Close up view: When looking at the close up, its not too bad. Any beam hitting the side of car one wont be received by a lidar. But my NURBS model for car 1 and 2 arent realistic. They are two blocks, one on top of the other. Ive missed on important aspect, side view mirrors.
thanks admin. It's working
NURBS setup. Two cars, one at 500m and one at 570m. Laser offset, 10m. The laser beam is a cone, 600m long and 1.8m at the base.
A perspecive:
Close up view:
When looking at the close up, its not too bad. Any beam hitting the side of car one wont be received by a lidar. But my NURBS model for car 1 and 2 arent realistic. They are two blocks, one on top of the other. Ive missed on important aspect, side view mirrors.
Good shots and they explain a lot. As much as they are not "perfect" they do demonstrate the problems facing officers. The third one's the best.....good job.
Good shots and they explain a lot. As much as they are not "perfect" they do demonstrate the problems facing officers. The third one's the best.....good job.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
maybe a mod can spilt this over to the law enforcement tools area... somewhere above this.... ************************************* seeing that a lane is 3.75m wide a typical car is 2.6m wide.......beam width is still less than the width of the car. At 500m beam is 1.5m wide. One at 570m...round it to even 1.8m for simplicity sake. Your "blocks" are realistic for Jeeps and Hummers :)
maybe a mod can spilt this over to the law enforcement tools area... somewhere above this....
*************************************
seeing that a lane is 3.75m wide a typical car is 2.6m wide.......beam width is still less than the width of the car.
At 500m beam is 1.5m wide. One at 570m...round it to even 1.8m for simplicity sake.
Your "blocks" are realistic for Jeeps and Hummers
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
You can still see that it is difficult to target the plate..... And like you said you can't see the beam even under alignment checks. The officer still does not know "exactly" where the beam is.......at a distance of 500 meters 1 degree is a lot, even 0.5 degrees of misalignment will cause this situation.
You can still see that it is difficult to target the plate..... And like you said you can't see the beam even under alignment checks. The officer still does not know "exactly" where the beam is.......at a distance of 500 meters 1 degree is a lot, even 0.5 degrees of misalignment will cause this situation.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
You are right, this thread is too long and discussion of lidars hijacked the thread. I shall have admin make me a mod for this section too and split it off.
hwybear wrote:
maybe a mod can spilt this over to the law enforcement tools area... somewhere above this....
*************************************
seeing that a lane is 3.75m wide a typical car is 2.6m wide.......beam width is still less than the width of the car.
At 500m beam is 1.5m wide. One at 570m...round it to even 1.8m for simplicity sake.
Your "blocks" are realistic for Jeeps and Hummers
You are right, this thread is too long and discussion of lidars hijacked the thread. I shall have admin make me a mod for this section too and split it off.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
I still do not see it when the beam is not relative to the distance. Nor are the size of vehicles. It to one perspective is construed, something like stats are! :D
Reflections wrote:
You can still see that it is difficult to target the plate..... And like you said you can't see the beam even under alignment checks. The officer still does not know "exactly" where the beam is.......at a distance of 500 meters 1 degree is a lot, even 0.5 degrees of misalignment will cause this situation.
I still do not see it when the beam is not relative to the distance. Nor are the size of vehicles. It to one perspective is construed, something like stats are!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
OK try this one: The ideallogy of the designer is that the plate is the target. Ideally it is the first thing hit, being at the front of the car. What happens when the plate is not the first thing to be hit??????????? That info is locked up in the designers head and won't be released due to the fact that it can be used by the other companies.
OK try this one: The ideallogy of the designer is that the plate is the target. Ideally it is the first thing hit, being at the front of the car. What happens when the plate is not the first thing to be hit??????????? That info is locked up in the designers head and won't be released due to the fact that it can be used by the other companies.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
The diagram still does not relate properly. I must be missing something in the description....all of a sudden we go from vehicles to a plate? If it is to mean two targets at the same time....the lidar will not compute that and gives the operator an error.
The diagram still does not relate properly. I must be missing something in the description....all of a sudden we go from vehicles to a plate?
If it is to mean two targets at the same time....the lidar will not compute that and gives the operator an error.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Hi Bear: Thats what Im wondering about. A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
Hi Bear:
Thats what Im wondering about. A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise.
Imax wrote:
A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise. When the beam is sent it hits the entire car. The gun will recieve the reflections from every point that is facing the gun. Thus, the amount of filtering done by the gun is extremely large. Now, when you target just the front plate, you are hitting the entire front end of the car. There are 3 good targets on the front of a vehicle, the plate and the 2 headlights. What you are saying about multiple targets doesn't add up.
hwybear wrote:
Imax wrote:
A lidar doesnt send a constant beam, but a series of pulses. Theres a microprocessor inside the lidar which tries to make sense of all signals received from all those pulses. Its going to try to get an average speed and throw out what could be noise. What if it locks onto car1s speed and thinks car2s speed is noise?
The lidar sends out more than 60 pulses per second. If 2 vehicles happen to be in the same beam, it will reject both and display an error message and NO speed reading. I am an operator of the unit, not an instructor, nor a scientist. If a dentist can use a lidar to fix my tooth or optometrist can fix my eyeball or military to guide bombs or reconstructionists to investigate traffic collisions, I think lidar is pretty precise.
When the beam is sent it hits the entire car. The gun will recieve the reflections from every point that is facing the gun. Thus, the amount of filtering done by the gun is extremely large. Now, when you target just the front plate, you are hitting the entire front end of the car. There are 3 good targets on the front of a vehicle, the plate and the 2 headlights. What you are saying about multiple targets doesn't add up.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
I dont doubt that if two vehicles are in the same beam, experience says that a lidar will reject both and display an error message and no speed reading. I have no problems in seeing a lidar being able to get the speed of car1, but the angles for car2 are really tight. Im guessing the lidar for car2 would need to be moved from whats in the NURBS pics, possibly aiming at the closest headlight. Given the tight angle and beam divergence, I can only see two possibilities. The lidar is reading car1 speed or its reading an error message.
I dont doubt that if two vehicles are in the same beam, experience says that a lidar will reject both and display an error message and no speed reading. I have no problems in seeing a lidar being able to get the speed of car1, but the angles for car2 are really tight. Im guessing the lidar for car2 would need to be moved from whats in the NURBS pics, possibly aiming at the closest headlight. Given the tight angle and beam divergence, I can only see two possibilities. The lidar is reading car1 speed or its reading an error message.
That is a better explanation of what I have been saying.......that IF the pictures were to scale (ie vehicles should be 2.6m wide) then there might be less chance a lidar could get #2. Veh 1 width of 2.6m, 500m the beam is 1.5m wide...therefore the whole beam can be placed on the car... Veh 2 width is 2.6m, 570m the beam width is 1.71m wide...therfore the whole beam can be placed on the car. Now what we have is the angle from the lidar to the vehicles, on a angle, can it target the 2nd vehicle? There is also sideways movement within the lane (as it is 3.75m wide) that also is not taken into account. Which each vehicle could move 1.15m left or right. This could add up to another 2.30m of lateral difference.
Imax wrote:
I have no problems in seeing a lidar being able to get the speed of car1, but the angles for car2 are really tight.
That is a better explanation of what I have been saying.......that IF the pictures were to scale (ie vehicles should be 2.6m wide) then there might be less chance a lidar could get #2.
Veh 1 width of 2.6m, 500m the beam is 1.5m wide...therefore the whole beam can be placed on the car...
Veh 2 width is 2.6m, 570m the beam width is 1.71m wide...therfore the whole beam can be placed on the car.
Now what we have is the angle from the lidar to the vehicles, on a angle, can it target the 2nd vehicle? There is also sideways movement within the lane (as it is 3.75m wide) that also is not taken into account. Which each vehicle could move 1.15m left or right. This could add up to another 2.30m of lateral difference.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Another "angle".........If you, the officer, can't get a reading off the plate of a vehicle then you are told to aim at the headlight. Would an officer try to get the second vehicle with only the headlight, drivers side, and mistakenly sample the first car?
Another "angle".........If you, the officer, can't get a reading off the plate of a vehicle then you are told to aim at the headlight. Would an officer try to get the second vehicle with only the headlight, drivers side, and mistakenly sample the first car?
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
In the training I have received.....we have always been told to target the front licence plate, if no plate, front centre between headlights OR on occassion the rear plate.....NEVER anywhere else and NEVER a partial corner (ie corner headlight) that is just stupid and not being used properly. I am not that hard up for tickets to start corner jabbing vehicles. There will be another vehicle come along if I wait long enough. I won't lose sleep over it as the vehicles are still travelling even when I'm home.
In the training I have received.....we have always been told to target the front licence plate, if no plate, front centre between headlights OR on occassion the rear plate.....NEVER anywhere else and NEVER a partial corner (ie corner headlight) that is just stupid and not being used properly.
I am not that hard up for tickets to start corner jabbing vehicles. There will be another vehicle come along if I wait long enough. I won't lose sleep over it as the vehicles are still travelling even when I'm home.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Hi Bear: I like your new avatar. Must check donut specifications - diameter, glazing thickness, and, most important, freshness. :) Ive never used a lidar. :oops: I look at health products and products that can have an impact on health. I cant see how a lidar can measure the speed of car2. The angles are too tight.
Hi Bear:
I like your new avatar. Must check donut specifications - diameter, glazing thickness, and, most important, freshness.
Ive never used a lidar.
I look at health products and products that can have an impact on health. I cant see how a lidar can measure the speed of car2. The angles are too tight.
Simply, if it's in too close to V1 then it can not be targeted. Now having said that, has the officer watched these 2 vehicles over time and neither appear to be gaining or pulling away from the other....then going relatively the same speed(within 5km/hr of each other). Could stop the 2nd one for speeding OR even follow too close.
Imax wrote:
I cant see how a lidar can measure the speed of car2. The angles are too tight.
Simply, if it's in too close to V1 then it can not be targeted.
Now having said that, has the officer watched these 2 vehicles over time and neither appear to be gaining or pulling away from the other....then going relatively the same speed(within 5km/hr of each other). Could stop the 2nd one for speeding OR even follow too close.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Hi Bear: As possibly the only one with lidar experience on this board, have you ever clocked two cars, one at 500 m and the other directly behind at 570m, and then managed to stop both cars by yourself ? (without causing an accident :) )
Hi Bear:
As possibly the only one with lidar experience on this board, have you ever clocked two cars, one at 500 m and the other directly behind at 570m, and then managed to stop both cars by yourself ? (without causing an accident )
I can only remember one of those types of stops about 3yrs ago. I have clocked 2 vehicles before (in the 150-155km/hr range) and successfully stopped both. This was about 3yrs ago (pre 172 era) I still remember the one vehicle (unusual vehicle travelling that speed) but don't remember the distances. The most I have stopped at once is 9 vehicles. Great big line of vehicles, so I took out the lead vehicle and the 8 others stopped :shock: ....all related and travelling together!! That was before the car-pool era!
Imax wrote:
Hi Bear:
As possibly the only one with lidar experience on this board, have you ever clocked two cars, one at 500 m and the other directly behind at 570m, and then managed to stop both cars by yourself ? (without causing an accident )
I can only remember one of those types of stops about 3yrs ago. I have clocked 2 vehicles before (in the 150-155km/hr range) and successfully stopped both. This was about 3yrs ago (pre 172 era) I still remember the one vehicle (unusual vehicle travelling that speed) but don't remember the distances.
The most I have stopped at once is 9 vehicles. Great big line of vehicles, so I took out the lead vehicle and the 8 others stopped ....all related and travelling together!! That was before the car-pool era!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got a ticket, Disobey stop sign, sec 136.1.a on dec 6th
I made a left in an intersection and was pulled over by a police officer in an unmarked car who had been sitting down the road. A classic fishing hole situation. I was genuinely surprised when he stopped me and told me I went through a stop sign without even slowing down. I know to shut up and be polite and take the ticket. I…
Yesterday morning, I rear-ended someone. I was going the speed limit. The sun was directly in front of me and it blinded my windshield and my eyes. At the same time, the person in front of me stopped/slowed down (also due to the sun). I started to slow down but didn't stop and I hit them since I couldn't see anything. I was not driving too close initially. I…
I was driving in the county at night and hit a limousine stretched out side ways across the road. The limo had its lights on and had side lighting as well. The police officer charged me with careless driving because it was "fully lit up".
It took me to the next day to figure out what had happened - what I remember made no sense. What I had run across was a "false visual reference" illusion.
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster untill I got pulled over at 147 on an 80 km hwy.
I alreaddy lost 3 points and this time was just the…
Hello, got stopped today for rolling a stop sign. Ticket says failure to stop, but quotes hta 1361b.
Doesn't 1361b mean failure to yield?
Is this a fatal error? Or could it be amended at trial. How can I prepare a defence if I don't know if I'm defending the failure to stop or the failure to yield?
After he was providing me with a ticket for failure to obey to the stop sign (I am pretty sure I stopped but less than 3 seconds recommended by my driver ed. instructor), I know everybody say that..as an excuse.
Then he stopped me again to return the documents.
Any advice and feed back would be really appreciated.
Can you get evidence for whether someone had an advanced green at an intersection? My dad was making a right turn on a red (after stopping) into a plaza parking lot. He got hit by someone making a left turn from the opposite lane. The driver told the officer called to the collision that he had an advance green. My dad said he came out of nowhere which makes me…
So i was driving on Eglinton Avenue East near Rosemount Ave.
The school bus was on the the curb on the opposite side of the road while i was travelling on the middle lane of the three-laned Eglinton Avenue East (five lanes apart plus a raised median island seperating the traffic)
I could not see the school bus as my view of the bus was being obstructed by the cars in front of me and on my left hand…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
This morning I had an exam for university. I was studying the entire night and i wanted to catch like maybe 1-2 hours of sleep before the exam so i went to sleep. I woke up like 5 hrs after and realize that I was about to miss my exam. I still could have made it so I asked my dad for his car since I was in a huge rush and he gave it to me.
I went on the highway and I was going at 135 km/h but…
the police officer was in in the opesite oncumming lane he was fallowing another car so close that i was not even able to see his cruser till he was buy he said that i was going 111 in a 80 he said he hade me on radar he only asked for me drivers licencs and never asked for my insurence so on the ticket there no insurence dose enyone think i can beat this i wana take it to cort becuse he was…
Hi I have a couple questions so I'll explain my situation and any advice would be appreciated.
Can't remember exact date so lets call it some time in 2008 I got a fine for $5000.00 for driving without in insurance. I never paid the fine and in 2012 I was pulled over and the officer asked to see my license. Although I had it on me I figured it would be under suspension for the unpaid fine from…
Alright, so I did something really stupid the other day, I was driving down a country road and wanted to hit the curves so I passed 3 cars at once, inadvertently making it up to very much past 50 over (80 limit)... Much to my chagrin there was a cop coming in the opposite direction who immediately skidded on the gravel shoulder and who I thought was 100% going to turn around and pull me over,…
Anyone know how backed this courthouse is? I submitted my ticket for trial at the end of August, and still no letter. Im scared it got lost in the mail, can i call the courthouse and find out my courtdate? Or would i have to go in personally?
I recently received a ticket for failure to use low beams - while following - Ticket was issued Sec 168 (
- it was on the 401 and no one was within 500 meters of me, I was warning a oncoming vehicle that there was an officer hiding (which is not illegal or I could not find a law against it) it was a police vehicle travelling at very high rate of speed in the opposite direction with no lights on…
I received a warning letter from MTO for a 2pts ticket.What happened is that the police officer issued a "unsafe left turn" and then changed the ticket to "failed to signal" at the scene, but she submitted both tickets!!! And I !!!ONLY!!! received the latter ticket from her(I requested trial for "failed to signal"). I recently received notice from MTO that I'm convicted for "unsafe left turn".
Hello everyone! I was given a ticket for using a hand-held communication device while driving. It was 3 am, I was at a stop light and the cop saw me with the my phone in my hand. I told him i was just checking the time on it. I received the notes a few weeks ago ill copy them down below. Any help is appreciated although i believe there's no hope for me. The cop recorded me saying what phone i…
I got pulled over about 15 or so days ago the court till this date has not received the summons what is the legal time period that the court has to follow to accept the summons from the office court says its 15 days is the legal timeframe the officer has to serve it on the court
I requested for disclosure of information two months ago.
I received the radar manual after one month, but not others (including maintenance/calibration record of the radar, certificate of police training). On further pursuit, the prosecutor told me that he did not have them and he did not see why I needed these documents. He said he did not know where to get them when I asked.
Last Friday I was pulled over by an OPP motorcycle cop who informed me I was going 134. I was on the SB 404, I did see him parked under a bridge and when I passed him he was not on his bike.
I'm hoping to get some insight for a defense in this case.
I was in lane 1 and I had a car in front of me, and a car behind me, also there was a car speeding down Lane 3 passing everyone and moved quickly into…